MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306644116 · doi:10.1016/j.cjcpc.2022.10.003

Sounder Reporting of Study Results by Systematic Screening for Erroneous Interpretation of P Values and Statistical Tests in Cardiology

2022· editorial· en· W4306644116 on OpenAlexaffabout
Frédéric Dallaire

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Medical physicsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyStatisticsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“This has nothing to do with pediatric and congenital cardiology.” Such was the response of a colleague when I showed him an earlier draft of this text. I disagreed. If we can improve the way we report cardiology research findings, then this has a lot to do with cardiology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.738
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.930
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.7380.930
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.010
Bibliometrics0.0350.026
Science and technology studies0.0060.031
Scholarly communication0.0220.020
Open science0.0120.014
Research integrity0.0200.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.249
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC Pediatric and Congenital Heart DiseaseSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207